We (Western Civilization) have a problem. We have a problem with Middle Eastern relations, with Muslim immigration (and refugees), with terrorism (foreign and homegrown). The common factor and thus the actual problem is Islam; not “radical” Islam… just Islam. But why? Why is Islam a problem? Why has Islam been a thorn in the side of Western civilization for 1400 years? And why has it reached a point of being an existential problem today?

Why Islam is a Problem – It’s Nature:
Islam has always been, is today, and always will be a problem when exposed to Western civilization. This is because Islam (through the teachings of Muhammad and Sharia law) contain at its core the seeds of fascism, and terrorism. These are the two main fruits of that “religion”.

Islam produces fascism/totalitarianism, when those in control of the state (government) are Islamic. Islam produces terrorism in individuals (who are Islamic) when the state is not. Again, those two seeds are there by the nature of the ideology created by Muhammad; the questions is whether or not the seeds take root and when.

Two Conflicting Ideas About Islam:
How can this be if Islam is a “religion of peace” one may ask. The simple answer is that it can’t be. One of these premises is false. Either Islam is a “religion of peace” OR it is a religion of “fascism and terrorism”. I submit through empirical evidence that if you simply read the words of Muhammad (on the whole), if you simply look at the actions of Muhammad, if you simply read the moral and legal code found in Sharia, if you look at the overall consequences of Islam (ignoring the myth and propaganda)… it’s pretty easy to ascertain which premise is true and which is not.

Jesus (the non-Islamic Jesus) said “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing (a claim to be a religion of peace), but inwardly they are ferocious wolves (fascist and terrorists). By their fruit (results of their faith and actions) you will recognize them. (We have had 1400 years of Islamic fruits on which to base our judgment) Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.” (Matthew 7:15-20)

To wit, Islam isn’t some religion of peace (good tree) hijacked by a few extremists… it’s a religion of extremism (death, destruction, and slavery) sometimes constrained by a slim majority of moderates and secularists. The true, faithful practitioners of Islam (as intended by Muhammad) are the fascist dictators and terrorists.

Seed of Islam: Fascist State
In the case of a nation, the seeds (of fascism) almost always take root in an Islamic state. If the controlling authorities of a nation are Islamic, the results is fascism. The two words are practically synonymous. The state is brutal towards anyone who does not fall into lockstep with Muhammad (and his current servants). To resist draws attention, imprisonment, and death. The idea of a minority religion receiving protection from an Islamic state in exchange for “jiyza” is a lie that has never existed. “Protection” and “jiyza” is Islamic code (and an excuse from Allah) to subjugate, enslave, and extort… until the Muslim decides to just go ahead and kill the offending infidel population.

Moreover the fascist Islamic state finances and exports terrorism to some extent to other Muslim nations that aren’t fascist (Islamic) enough, and to infidels who must (by Muhammad’s command) be subjugated (enslaved) and converted (by the sword if necessary) or killed. THIS, is a key facet of Islam that the world has been subjected to for fourteen centuries.

Seed of Islam: Terrorists and the False Hope of Moderate Islam
In the case of the individual (when the state is not Islamic and the individual is), the seeds are much less likely to germinate. (Yayyy…) In fact, western society generally produces a “moderate” Muslim/Islamist with little interest in their religion. This tendency to not put much effort or faith into a religion is not a trait of Islam or Muslims but of mankind in general (which is also why you see so many secular Jews, and “Christians”).

So, “moderation” mostly occurs with “secular” practitioners of Islam who have inherited their religion by birth; but pay little or no attention to its edicts to subdue, force tribute, hate and/or drive into the sea… One might call these practitioners “luke-warm” Islamists. Fundamentalists Islamists would call them apostates and seek to convert, subdue, or kill them (in that order). This “moderation” is about the best a host/infidel nation can hope for from an Islamic community or individual.

The biggest problem with a “luke-warm” Islamic population is that they cling just enough to the religion to keep the seed of terror alive (buried… dormant… but alive). Eventually someone in this community bothers to read (and believe and practice) the teachings of Muhammad (and/or Sharia) and the next thing you know they’re shooting up an office, school, or nightclub (screaming “Allahu Akbar” and looking forward to a little virgin nookie). Even if the groups of refugees or immigrants themselves don’t germinate the seed of fundamentalist Islam, their progeny (latter generations) are susceptible to getting pissed-off at their adopted country (that they haven’t assimilated into for some reason). Once disillusioned, they fall back on the religion/culture that made their fatherland the hellhole it was (and probably still is today).

The greater the population of the Islamic community the greater the probability you’re going to have a spontaneous combustion of Islamic terrorist events (manmade disasters to those of you on the left). By that standard Europe is royally #$@%ed for several generations (if not existentially). The U.S. is… slightly less #$@%ed; and will reach the state of Europe if the left is not stopped from carrying out its fundamental transformation (as implemented by Obama and the left). Unfortunately, the damage (fruits of death and destruction) the relatively small number of Islamists will do and the terror they will inflict on society will really never go away. As long as Islam is present… that seed will be present.

Back to the “moderates”, I would have to agree with Winston Churchill (1899) that “Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.”

Yes… granted… Percentage wise the number of Islamic spontaneous combustions (in Europe and the U.S.) is small in comparison to the overall population of Islamists (though huge when compared to other races/religions). So let’s look at the good… moderate… majority… practitioners of Islam.

Generally, a “moderate” Muslim/Islamist doesn’t want to actually pull the trigger on the infidels of his adopted nation; but will “understand”, “sympathize”, (and sometimes celebrate) with the ones who do. They will scream with indignation (“they don’t represent my peaceful religion”) when Islam produces yet another rotten fruit (terrorist attack, socially abhorrent behavior, etc.)… but when it comes to actual action to reclaim their “religion of peace” from the terrorists? The “moderate” Muslim is the same as the moderate German (during WWII), moderate Japanese (during WWII), moderate Russian (during the cold war), and moderate Chinese (during Mao reign). The proper term would be IRRELEVANT. MILLIONS upon MILLIONS died during these evil regimes. “Moderate” Muslims are no more the answer to the evil Islam would impose upon the world if given half a chance than their predecessors.

Proof? Half (51%) of Muslim Americans support the implementation of Sharia law over U.S. law and over the U.S. Constitution for Muslim communities. A quarter (25%) of Muslim Americans believe “violence against Americans here in the United States can be justified as part of the global jihad.” (Source Center for Security Policy) Remember that Sharia would implement the subjugation (and death at the whim of Islamic leaders) of non-believers who won’t convert, horrific oppression of women, the execution of gays, the extermination of Jews, and the beheading of anyone who draws Muhammad. Islam is malicious by nature; Sharia is Islam on steroids. Half of Muslim Americans say “Yep… that’s what we need”.

And these are the “moderates” that are embraced by the useful idiots in the media, and the halls of power. Vladimir Lenin reportedly said “The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.” He was only half right. We seem ready to sell the rope to our executioners, but it will be to the fascist Islamists (not the communists) we sell the rope to, and the paltry price will be the warm fuzzy feeling of inclusion and political correctness.

Useful Idiots Embrace is Islam
By useful idiot standards, I am an Islamophobe, exhibiting a “hatred or fear of Muslims/Islam or of their politics or culture”. In my defense, I neither hate nor fear any man based on his race. It is his actions, his fruits if you will, and the fruits of what he embraces (be that a culture or religion) that I base any reaction to (hatred, fear or even respect). Also, a phobia implies an irrational fear of something. Being afraid of Islam is not irrational. Only a fool ignores an apparent danger for the appearance of diversity and open minded acceptance. Any rational man who loves life, liberty, individualism, and freedom should fear Islam’s encroachment and influence on our society. Islam, by its fascist and totalitarian nature, is antithetical to these founding principles. (Fundamentalists) Islam has plans for us; and the “moderates” will watch passively (and eventually celebrate) if that horror ever comes to pass upon America and western society.

Another scary aspect of this posting (concerning how far Western civilization has fallen) is that it would be illegal in Canada and Great Britain (two Western nations) and deemed a hate crime. It will be illegal in the U.S. soon enough.

Progressivism is to blame. In fact, progressivism is actually the existential threat to Western civilization. Islam will simply prove to be the barbarians who loot and pillage what remains when the progressives have their way. Progressivism invites the barbarian hordes through the gates. Progressivism seeks to destroy and dilute western culture. Progressivism makes it a crime (or at least socially egregious) to speak the truth (any truth).

The only solace the sane have is that the progressives will be put against the wall right after us.

Actually the real solace the sane have is found only in God and His Son, Jesus Christ! As bad as we (men) seem to make things, we (the sane) must remind ourselves that He is in control.

Psalm 97:10 (NIV) Hate evil, you who love the LORD, Who preserves the souls of His godly ones; He delivers them from the hand of the wicked.

Romans 12:9 (NIV) Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good.

I’m offended! I suspected I should have been offended much earlier… but had a hard time verifying it. This alone is a statement on the sad state of the “free press” in this nation. (But I digress…)

We begin with Obama, his administration, and the left in general being total a##holes and idiots concerning the Islamic terrorist attack in Odessa Florida.

The Narrative:
The left has a narrative they have elected to follow in cases of domestic terrorism. First understand that it’s not terrorism. It’s workplace violence, it’s violence caused by right-wing (or Christian) hate, it’s racism, it’s guns, it’s anything but Islamic and anything but terror. All of those things really boil down to one overriding mindset. It’s America’s fault.

So the left wasted no time in taking advantage of the latest crisis (let none go to waste after all).

The various narratives included.
1) This is a gun control issue. Guns are the problem and we need to ramp up registration, and outright banning of those things. If we could just get rid of guns everything would be OK. The House Democrats even threw a hissy-fit (sit in) on the House floor.

2) Omar Mateen was a self-loathing homosexual. This was caused by the right in America opposing gay rights, gay marriage and transsexuals. If the right would embrace these things, then homosexuals would be able to embrace their nature and love themselves. No more homosexual suicides, no more homosexuals mowing down other homosexuals in nightclubs. If the rights (and Christians) do not embrace the homosexual agenda then they are responsible for these attacks.

3) Omar Mateen hated Hispanics (a spin on the homosexual angle) because Hispanics gays treated him badly and told him (after sex) that they were HIV positive. (see here)

You can see the pattern. Any reason will do… just not related to terror or Islam. If Mateen had ever made a dime near that club, the left would be pushing workplace violence as the reason.

Just to be clear (from the right)… Whether or not this SOB was a self-loathing homosexual has nothing to do with me (or my side). If you want to blame anybody, blame dear old dad, Mohamed (specifically THE “Prophet”, not every other Muslim you can shake a stick at), the Koran, and Allah (pretty well in that order). We Christians may disagree with and oppose the homosexual agenda; but we as a rule don’t want gays imprisoned, or killed (as in throwing them off buildings or shooting them in night clubs)… and our opposition to their agenda is not even close to equivalent to the teachings (as actually practiced) of Islam.

With this narrative in mind, at first Obama (through Lynch and the DOJ) decided they would redact the 911 call made by Mateen in which he pledged allegiance to some Islamic ISIS prick (Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi). Supposedly this is what ISIS wants (the association) so Obama and Lynch were determined to deny them that.

“What we’re not going to do is further proclaim this man’s pledges of allegiance to terrorist groups, and further his propaganda. We are not going to hear him make his assertions of allegiance… We’re trying to get information out. It’s our goal to be as transparent as possible in this investigation.” – Loretta Lynch

The problem is… the association is there. Everybody knows it’s there. So pretending otherwise just makes you look weak and stupid (of course in this case appearances mirror reality).

There seems to be a smidgen of sanity still left in the nation, so Lynch caught hell for the decision (and rightly so). (Side Note: Have you noticed it’s black women who are tasked with spreading this crap. Susan Rice on the video causing Benghazi… Lynch on this crap.) So… Lynch agreed to release the “full transcript”… but that’s not really what they did. That’s good.

The Transcript:
A transcript is…
Transcript: (noun) a written, printed, or typed copy; especially : a usually typed copy of dictated or recorded material

So here’s what the Islamic (possibly homosexual) terrorist Omar Mateen said (as released by Obama/Lynch/DOJ)…

“In the name of God the Merciful, the beneficent [Arabic]… Praise be to God, and prayers as well as peace be upon the prophet of God [Arabic]. I wanna let you know, I’m in Orlando and I did the shootings… I pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi may God protect him [Arabic], on behalf of the Islamic State.” — Literally copy and pasted from the DOJ Web Site. (see here)

The Crux of my Outrage:OK… so there we have it. Except for one problem. This is NOT (literally) what Mateen said. The DOJ changed it (for political reasons) to match the Obama/Left agenda.

How was it changed? Everywhere you see “God” (the Jewish/Christian deity), replace that with “Allah” the Muslim deity. And thus the crux of my being offended. This may sound insignificant to those who are secular; but it’s not to those who actually worship God (in contrast to the god Allah).

The key here is that the f#cker (Mateen) was speaking English. There was no translation needed. There are only two reasons why the you would translate “Allah” to “God”.
1) You suspect that your audience is unfamiliar with the name “Allah”. (Nobody on the face of the planet is.)
2) You want to push propaganda implying that Allah and God are the same, and that Christianity and Islam are equivalent in guilt for these attacks. (Obviously what Obama, the Left, and the DOJ are implying.)

For perspective; if a nut pledged allegiance to “Cthulhu”, you might add an appendix explaining that this was a god (small g) from an H. P. Lovecraft novel that has worked it’s way into certain popular culture. You WOULDN’T translate the name “Cthulhu” as “God” asserting that it and the Jewish/Christian God are the same (in either substance, equivalence, or being). It’s just absurd, disparaging, and sacrilegious.

Perpetual Cluelessness:
Loretta Lynch and thus Obama is still droning on about we may never know the terrorists’ motivation in the attack. This is just one more (out of many) signs of their ineptitude and cluelessness. Barack! Loretta! Do you think his motivation might have to do with him shouting “Alluh Akbar” while he is killing people? Do you think his pledged allegiance to other terrorists (and Allah) might give us some clues as to his motivation?

This is precisely the reason using the words “radical Islam” matters. It gives some sign to your electorate, to the world, that you get it.

Conclusion:
What is most offensive to me as a Christian is equivocating Allah to the God of Jews and Christians. Again, It is absurd no matter how much the left and “moderate” Muslims push this idea.

Islam is NOT equivalent (morally) to Christianity. “You will know them (false prophets) by their fruits (their actions and the results)” — Jesus (the Christ)

Jesus (in the Koran) is NOT the same Jesus of the Cross/Bible. The One (Christian Jesus) who is “the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” is NOT the same Jesus (toady for Allah) found in the Koran.

Allah is NOT the same being as the Jewish/Christian God; despite the best efforts of the “prophet” Mohamed to hijack Him. Quite simply, the “God [who] so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son” is not the same god (Allah) who gave us the likes of Mohamed, his followers, and the $^#* Islam (overall) has inflicted upon the world for the past 14 centuries.

I thought there was a very good article on the faith of Reverend Martin Luther King on national review today.
Please see it here: King’s Media Makeover

The key points I took from the article were:
1) King was very much a Reverend in terms of being a man dedicated to Christ
2) The left (and it servant the secular media) by their nature try to de-emphasize that fact
3) The comparison between King (a Christian) and Malcolm X (A Muslim) are compelling, though when you think about the two religions also predictable

The Reverend King:
King received an undergraduate degree in Bible studies; today that would be called a divinity degree. His Ph.D. was in theology, giving him the preferred secular title of Doctor. Like all men (and all Christians) King had his faults; but he was a man seeking the straight and narrow path described by his Lord.

“The Bible wasn’t some strange old book that didn’t have relevance in the modern world. It was God’s word. It was a book that was — and always will be — relevant because it expresses eternal principles and eternal truths.” – Lee Habeeb, National Review (Jan 2016)

King expressed his faith in his speeches which often included biblical and religious references. He used his faith to further the social justice cause. That’s great, but it wasn’t just some secular ideal of justice he was seeking. The social justice he worked and died for was something he saw as the will of God and the work God had placed him on this Earth to do.

Today, any mention of God or religion in the furtherance of social or political causes brings immediate condemnation and cries for separation of church and state. Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, and others are hated and marginalized because of their faith. Yet they don’t hold a candle to King when it comes to interjecting faith into their cause. Meanwhile the media (the tormentors of the faithful) doesn’t have this problem with Doctor King; because they completely ignore and whitewash God out of King’s character. Ironically, this would be the worst insult one could inflict upon a true Christian.

Many of Kings speeches contained biblical references. His famous speech “A Knock at Midnight” quoted the parable from Luke 11:5–6

Luke: 11: 5-6 Which of you who has a friend will go to him at midnight and say to him, “Friend, lend me three loaves; for a friend of mine has arrived on a journey, and I have nothing to set before him”?

King explained the meaning of the parable but expanded upon it…

“Although this parable is concerned with the power of persistent prayer, it may also serve as a basis for our thought concerning many contemporary problems and the role of the church in grappling with them. It is midnight in the parable; it is also midnight in our world, and the darkness is so deep that we can hardly see which way to turn.” — Reverend Martin Luther King

What I find interesting is in the middle of the speech where King explains exactly how we find ourselves in the dark at midnight…

“Moral principles have lost their distinctiveness. For modern man, absolute right and wrong are a matter of what the majority is doing. Right and wrong are relative to likes and dislikes and the customs of a particular community. We have unconsciously applied Einstein’s theory of relativity, which properly described the physical universe, to the moral and ethical realm. . . . This mentality has brought a tragic breakdown of moral standards, and the midnight of moral degeneration deepens.” — Reverend Martin Luther King

THAT could have been written yesterday. It perfectly defines the moral relativism and decay our society half a century later.

In his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” King explained the source of rightfulness of his cause…

“We will win our freedom because the sacred heritage of our nation and the eternal will of God are embodied in our echoing demands.” — Reverend Martin Luther King

Did you hear that. King described the “heritage” of this nation as “sacred” and tied it to the will of God. Both (God and our American heritage) demanded social justice be heard.

Today, these would be words of sacrilege to the left… But don’t worry; the left never hears them. Doctor Martin Luther King was a great man who fought for a liberal cause. Reverend Martin Luther King? Never existed.

“How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.” — Reverend Martin Luther King

“Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the promised land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land.” — Reverend Martin Luther King (I Have a Dream Speech)

“And so I’m happy, tonight. I’m not worried about anything. I’m not fearing any man! Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord!” — Reverend Martin Luther King (The final words of the last public speech he gave)

The Secular Leftist Media:
Then there is the Main Stream Media… the secular media that harbors such hatred for God, Christ, and traditional moral values. What are they to do with a hero of the left that was in fact a man of God? Answer: They re-brand him; they recreate the secular hero from bits and pieces of the man, sifting out the parts they don’t like; much as they do the opposite to founding fathers and conservatives they hate.

What would be the media’s reaction today if someone like Mike Huckabee said the words King uttered concerning lost principles, and absolute right and wrong being a matter of majorities likes, dislikes, and costumes; applying relativity to the moral and ethical realm; resulting in a tragic breakdown of moral standards, and a deepening midnight of moral degeneration?

Answer: The howls of indignation and condemnation would reverberate in the halls of the New York Times, the Washington Post, et. al… How dare such a man try and impose his backward, archaic moral code upon a “free” society that so values the separation of church and state. Such a man should stick to the pulpit and keep his barbarous ideas there where they belong and out of the public arena.

As for these ideas coming from the man Doctor Marin Luther King, the media simply resolves the problem the same way the take care of any bit of history, or facts they don’t like; they cover it up and rewrite it to their lacking. The use the omission of information and when necessary outright misinformation to produce the narrative that will best serve them (and the public).

Lee Habeeb, the author of the original National Review article, challenged his readers not to take his word for it; but to read and watch the mainstream media and see if they could find references to the “Reverend” or any references to his faith. So I searched ABC, CBS, CNN, and NBC for “Martin Luther King”… on Marking Luther King Day no less. I was surprised at exactly how little there was out there. Mostly there were picture tributes (which was rather lazy if you ask me). There was one article on ABC that had the “Rev” title in the link to an article, but once there it was not to be found. The article itself was a piece of crap saying that King had body guards with guns and even got a gun permit (after a bomb attack) but he never carried a gun and surely would have come around on gun control. Everything else was just a few puff pieces with no mention of his faith…

And THIS is the state of journalism in our society today.

The left is in a totalitarian mindset today; and the two things dictators get rid of first are God and guns (from those they would rule).

Christ vs Mohammad:
A really eye opening aspect of faith of King was the corresponding faith of Malcolm X. The contrast surprised me when it really shouldn’t have. In fact the contrast in the faith, actions, and lives of the two men is a perfect microcosm of the Christianity and Islam.

“King also invoked God’s mercy in his speeches. And nonviolence was his methodology. Peaceful protests, he thought, were the most effective way to stir the conscience of a nation.” — Lee Habeeb (January 2016, National Review)

Guess who didn’t exactly agree with this approach? Guess who would have burned the whole thing down and subjugated America under Islamic (fascist) law?

“The same old slave master today has negroes who are nothing but modern Uncle Toms, 20th-century Uncle Toms, to keep you and me in check, keep us passive and peaceful and nonviolent. That’s Tom making you nonviolent. — Malcolm X (Calling King an Uncle Tom)

“A revolution is bloody. Revolution is hostile. Revolution knows no compromise. Revolution overturns and destroys everything that gets in its way. And you sit around here like a knot on a wall saying, “I’m going to love these folks no matter how much they hate me.” No, you need a revolution.” — Malcolm X

“Whoever heard a revolution where they lock arms . . . singing “We Shall Overcome”? Just tell me. You don’t do that in a revolution. You don’t do any singing; you’re too busy swinging.” — Malcolm X

The contrast in these two men is perfect in exposing the contrast between the two religions; the difference between the heads of those religions; and finally the fruits those two faiths produce in the world.

Conclusion:
Like the original author of this column, I have to ask myself what would king have to say about the current problems we face as a nation (especially the black community)? Fatherlessness? Crime? Drug Abuse? Abortion? Leftist Fascism? Movements Built on Lies (Black Lives Matter)?

King was a leftist (though I doubt so left as many today); but he undoubtedly saw government as the instrument for social change. He believed in the redistribution of wealth to help the poor which he cared deeply about. He and I would have disagreed on much; maybe not so much on the goals than on the best means by which to achieve them.

But I believe that we would have agreed upon the fundamental truth that all things are possible through Christ.

Given that religious zeal is so far from their [the left’s] hearts, they have a hard time believing the words of the religious. Thus the constant quest to discern the “real” reasons why believers behave the way they do. [Thus attributing extremist Islam to global warming or inequality…]

It is one of the quirks of the modern Left that this inability to understand faith leads them to think better of America’s enemies and worse of their fellow citizens. Thus, jihadists aren’t evil religious zealots utterly dedicated to killing their way to the Apocalypse. They’re oppressed youth in need of a good jobs program. Meanwhile, the Evangelical Christian down the street isn’t simply trying to know and do the will of God — he’s seizing on ancient and discredited texts to justify his hatred for women and gays. — David French December 1, 2015 (National Review)

See Something Say Something?
Everybody knows in post 911 “If You See Something, Say Something.” Taking that action has actually saved lives over the last decade; just as missing that something has cost lives. It’s really good advise in times of war.

But… from the lefts perspective we’re not at war. So what do you do with the advise given above.

You do what is in the nature of liberalism to do. You fake it. You give it lip service. Then you wink and nod and offer secret handshakes when in the exclusive company of your own. That’s when you condescendingly explain to your fellow liberals the clinging to religion and guns mentality of the unwashed.

Finally you watch for opportunity to tear down the hated things society forces you to pretend to love or support; and if you can manufacture such opportunity, so much the better. For the left, appearance, words, and intentions trump reality and actual results.

It’s funny, but that mentality is very Islamic. Lying and deceit are perfectly fine with Allah when dealing with infidels; as long as the deceit serves Allah (and his prophet I suppose). Replace Allah with the god of liberalism and… there you go.

So when it comes to “If You See Something, Say Something”, Liberalism and Islam-ism have a common enemy; though (at least here in the U.S.) neither can admit it. They can however attack and subvert the foundation of the idea when the opportunity arises. This is done through the cudgels of race-hustling, grievance-mongering, and political correctness.

Cue the Opportunity and Hell to Pay:
As we’ve probably all heard by now, Ahmed Mohamed is an inquisitive, electrically proficient, ninth grade youth living and going to school in Irving Texas. All of the above (except for the inquisitive part) are skills in high demand to men who share one or both of the kids given names.

This Mensa “genius” as described by every meat-head reporter doing a puff-piece… recently took a backpack full of circuit boards and wires to school. It took two teachers and an alarm beeping from his backpack before enough was seen and something said.

And just so we’re clear here in the terms of the left and the Islamists. “See Something, Say Something” is fine. Just understand this. If you do, you had better be right; OR if you’re wrong, it had better be about a Caucasian male. Otherwise there will be hell to pay.

Ahmed was detained, questioned, and released to his parents… Ohhh the humanity. The real error in all of this is that it took a second teacher and an alarm in the middle of class to achieve this result.

Cue the Islamic Stench:
Setting that important detail aside… let me take this one step further. This story of this whole scenario stinks to high heaven. Here are a few whiffs to consider.

First Mohamed Elhassan Mohamed (father to Ahmed), isn’t just some mild mannered immigrant now caught up in an innocent feel-good Muslim victim news story. He “occasionally” returns to Sudan (where he came from) to run for president. Yeah… normal people do that all the time. And remember that nut in Florida burning the Qurans? This Mohamed is the Mohamed who made national headlines debating him.

Second, CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations) and it’s lawyers got real involved real quick. These are the terrorist supporting community organizers constantly stirring up trouble where ever they can. CAIRs message here is crystal clear. If “See Something… Keep Your Dam Mouth Shut If It Involves a Muslim or You Will Be Branded as a Racist Islamophobic Bastard!”

Thirdly, there is the just plain old common sense factor. Nobody (much less a genius as he is depicted) is so void of common sense as to believe a backpack full of circuit boards, wires and maybe a clock display taken to a school is anything other than asking… begging even… for trouble.

But Ahmed, his parents, and the left would have us believe that this little “genius” would just as innocently try to pass this through White House security and claim… “It’s just a clock… no it doesn’t look like a bomb to me…” Also imagine the reaction of Obama’s security detail to such a device. Ahmed has been invited to White House by the panderer in Chief. Might I suggest to the family that they show up a little early for a tour of the visitor center (without giving Barry a heads-up) and don’t forget the clock. 🙂 You want to see a reaction? You want to see a few guns drawn? And this way the whole family could be involved.

My point… the suspension of disbelief from journalists, the left, and Islamic apologist (on such a national scale) is phenomenal here. But logic and reality have never been their strong points.

Finally, when told by his first teacher (the science guy) NOT to show this to anyone else. What did our innocent little genius Mohamed do? He didn’t turn it off. He didn’t stash it in a locker. No, he stuffed it in a backpack and had an alarm go off in English class. THEN… instead of just turning off the alarm… he yanks it out and does exactly what he was warned not to do. Show it to another teacher.

That is when he got the reaction he (as instructed by dear old dad) was looking for; someone seeing something and saying something… and the proper recourse that comes with it.

That’s right. I’m saying this sh#t was orchestrated by Mohamed Elhassan Mohamed and carried out by his son Ahmed Mohamed. And it worked. It got the leftist reaction they were looking for AND the Islamic reaction they were looking for (via CAIR). It would not surprise me if CAIR (at some level) was involved from the beginning as well.

This has the stink of lying and deceit directed at infidels for the benefit of Allah all over it. see Lying (Taqiyya and Kitman) And who can blame them? Misdirection and deceit have the blessing of Allah (and his prophet, Allah bless him and protect him and blah blah blah).

Allah’s Reward:
For his reward, Ahmed now has the admiration of the President (not to mention a White House visit), various leftist politicians and business leaders (invites from Google, Twitter). Ahmed is the bell of the liberal ball. CAIR (and their lawyers) have formed a circle around the family ready to milk this for all the propaganda (and dollars) it’s worth.

And finally, there is the Main Stream media. “The story immediately became ubiquitous not because of what actually happened, but because it can be used to further a story that the media already want to tell: that the United States is morally corrupt and irredeemably racist; that Muslims are under siege; that “white privilege” blinds the majority of Americans to the corruption at the heart of everything red, white, and blue.” (Kevin Williamson, National Review)

Looking for a More Inclusive School:
Conveniently, the Mohameds have decided Ahmed will find a more “inclusive” institution to continue his education. I submit that decision was made by father, son, and family some time ago. I have a few suggestion… all of them outside of Texas, most of them in Sudan.

A Self-Evident Truth:
The media is throwing a hissy-fit over recent comments by Dr. Ben Carson that “I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that. If [a president’s faith is] inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter.”

Ben Carson is exactly right. A Muslim commander in chief would be a travesty for this nation. Further, the incompatibility would endanger its very existence.

I believe the media (and even some conservatives) missed the point of Dr. Carson and lamented that he should learn a little civics. This included Senator Ted Cruz (of Texas) who said “You know, the Constitution specifies there shall be no religious test for public office and I am a constitutionalist”.

Carson did not address whether or not Muslims should not have the right to run for the office. He simply made two points.
1. We (the voters) should not put a Muslim in charge of the nation.
2. It the candidate’s faith is inconsistent with the values and principles of America (which Islam is) then that should matter in the selection of our leader.

Both points are not only true, they are self-evidently so… or at least should be.

Antithetical:
Islam is antithetical to democracy and freedom. It’s very nature seeks to destroy any system that is not Islamic. It is a religion of subjugation and slavery; and not so much your submission and slavery to Allah, but to those who would set themselves up to define who/what Allah is… thus by it’s very nature Islam promotes fascism, totalitarianism, and oppression.

But it goes beyond just the U.S., Islam’s morals and mores are antithetical to western civilization as a whole. Just the basics of civil rights, slavery, pedophilia, and murder prove the two are incompatible. It is probably too late for Europe to realize or reverse the damage of this cold hard fact. “Mass immigration by Muslims is altering the culture of Europe because Muslims don’t join the culture of their new homelands. Muslims do not so much enhance European culture as supplant it, and are patiently conquering Europe’s cities, street by street”. (paraphrasing author Christopher Caldwell)

Protecting the Republic:
So, If we (the people, the voters) are to protect the principles upon which our nation (and civilization itself) was founded, then no… No Muslim (defined as “a follower of the religion of Islam”) should be allowed anywhere near the Presidency. And as if by prophetic warning, we’ve already seen first-hand the damage one who simply identifies with Muslim culture can do.

Does that mean that no Muslim should be allowed to run for office (any office). No… freedom and democracy demand it. They should just never be elected. If we are that stupid; if we are that willing to open the gates to the invading hordes who seek to destroy us (and we may be); we deserve what we get.

Attacking the messenger of an obvious truth such as this is just a tactic of the hordes who threaten our freedom.

Immigration:
I will also go one step further… In fact, considering Europe, Islam should be a mitigating factor within our immigration policy. These hard truths and resolutions to address them may seem harsh… and by western standards, they are. But they are far less harsh than what the true followers of Mohammed have planned for us (long and short term).

The leftist administration is planning on importing tens of thousands of Muslim refugees into this nation. This process will include screening each for diseases such as tuberculosis. Shouldn’t we screen for another sickness just as dangerous (if not more so) to our very existence?

Texas is a state that sees great population growth. Why? Because we still understand the principles that made this nation great. So we produce jobs and grow at the expense of those states that have abandoned those founding principles. Thus a common refrain from Texans is “Welcome to Texas, try not to screw it up like the place you just left”. Is it too much to ask Muslims who are fleeing a cesspool to abandon and denounce the very %$#* that made it a cesspool.

The Once Diverse Meaning of Discriminating:
Discrimination wasn’t always a word with the total negative connotation it has today. We can say thanks to the lefts Ministry of Truth for that. Once when someone was “discriminating”, they had “good taste” and/or “character”. Who your friends are, who you do business with, who you are willing to associate with says something about who you are. Guess what? Who you exclude from your association says something about who you are too. Be that something good or bad, shouldn’t we at least have the right to make that choice? The left says… “No”; sometimes correctly in the case of race and sometimes not in the case of homosexuality. It really comes down to choice, morality and where that line is drawn.

The god of Science:
The left, of course, justifies this by stating (falsely) that homosexuality is genetic… completely genetic… god/nature made me this way… I had no control over this… it’s just like race… This is of course religious belief disguised as science. The left (and sodomites themselves) want this to be true, so they have their god, “Science”, decree it to be so. Anyone who uses actual science to refute this is branded a heretic.

Science (not the god) may confirm that there is a genetic component to homosexuality, but that also infers other factors which give credence to choice. The lefts arguments fall apart if choice is in the equation at all. Equating sodomy to race no longer applies. Some blacks are aware of this and justifiably outraged by the comparison.

So the world (the left) builds its house on the sands of appearance and half-truths and seek to remake the world and those in it in their image.

Examples of Being Discriminating:
Should a pet store have the right to refuse service to individuals it deems will be abusive to the animals they sell? Can they elect not to sell a puppy to someone who admits they plan to eat it? Or is that culturally and racially insensitive? Can pet store owners elect not to sell to perverts or are they being judgmental?

Should a Jewish (or Muslim) deli be forced to prepare and serve ham sandwiches (or a whole roasted pig) to gentile gatherings?

Should a black business be forced cater, photograph, or decorate for a Neo Nazi or Klan event? Or should they be free, in good conscience to tell those seeking their services to “get bent” which translates into “please take your business elsewhere”?

While I would hope the answer to the above questions are self-evident; in this day and age, I’m not so sure anymore. While a majority of Americans could easily and quickly come to the right conclusions above, they lack the logic and empathy to apply the same basic human rights to a most hated of groups among them, Christians. Today, treading upon fundamental and sacred rights of that hated group is the social and political norm.

Christian Persecution

The Approaching Storm:
We Christians had better get used to it. Because it’s going to get worse… a lot worse… and soon. Individuals and business will soon face bankruptcy and jail if they dare live by their faith. Churches will be punished and persecuted (beginning with their tax-exempt status) if they refuse to teach homosexuality as normal and moral…

Of course individuals and companies should be free to discriminate (yes, discriminate) against individuals they find morally objectionable and/or against their religious beliefs. It is a basic and core tenet of the First Amendment (freedom of religion AND association clauses). But the precepts of our Constitution and the freedoms it confirms is alien and offensive to the secular left who will sacrifice them on an altar of political correctness.

A Christian business (caterer, florist, bakery, photographer, etc…) should not be forced to provide services to people engaged in abhorrent (from their religious perspective) behavior; especially when the service they are being compelled to participate in has religious overtones.

Of course we immediately think of homosexuals and weddings. But who would disagree that religious people and businesses have the right to refuse and not participate in services of pagans, wiccans, polygamists, etc? We’re not asking that these idiots be branded, marked, or even beheaded (as would occur in countries practicing the “religion of peace”). We’re just asking you to go do your thing and leave us the #$@% alone!

But that’s not going to happen. Want to preach that homosexuality is a sin? Get ready to be fined or go to jail. Get ready to be silenced. Want to exclude gay weddings from your church? Get ready to lose your tax exempt status or worse. But it’s not as if we should be surprised, Christ and the apostles warned us of the world and what it would do to us for His sake. We are not commanded to win (He did that), just to try, just to run the good race.

And make no mistake about it; this is a worldly attack on Christians and Christians only… else you would see the same issues brought against the businesses owned by practitioners of “religion of peace” (see video below). You will not see this for two reasons. 1) Islam is not as hated by the left as Christianity is AND 2) Islam has made it very clear what it thinks about sodomites and heretics and what it is willing to do to them. The left has got that message loud and clear. The worst leftist can expect from a Christian is honest disagreement and an attempt to legally secure the rights leftist seek to take away. They have courageously deduced it better to attack the “hater” who won’t make his point by cutting off your head…

The Lost Cultural War:
The Cultural War has been lost (or won from the lefts perspective) and now all that is left to be done is to deliver a coup de grâce to the wounded and dying conservatives that still struggle. That’s pretty well what’s happening with the attacks on Religious Freedom laws in Indiana and Arkansas.

It’s both sad and scary that the only barrier between us (conservatives & Christians) and the fascist left (led by the LGBT gestapo) are a bunch of eunuchs that make up the Republican Party. Indiana Gov. Mike Pence and Republicans legislators threw up the white flag within hours of being attacked.

Briefly it looked like Arkansas, led by Gov. Asa Hutchinson would do the right thing, but after a quick phone call from Wal-Mart, he backpedaled pretty quickly. The bottom line (at Wal-Mart & state governments), does not sound policy make.

Meanwhile, there has been no pretense (not even from Republicans) that religious people have rights not to be compelled to participate in homosexual events. We’ve lost so much ground within country and the Republican Party, no one will even take to the field of battle/debate on our behalf. The left instead puts forth that if you are not willing to serve everybody (and by that they mean if you do not acquiesce to their beliefs 100%) then you are not entitled to even be in business, not even entitled to make a living.

The Lost Rule of Law:
The whole issue of gay marriage is about to be settled (in the affirmative) by the U.S. Supreme Court where over 300 Republicans signed an amicus (friend of the court) brief in support of homosexual wedding being made legal nationally. “Among the signatories are 23 current and former Republicans members of the House of Representatives and Senate and seven current and former Governors… including Sens. Susan Collins and Mark Kirk, Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker and former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman. Other notables include former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal and billionaire GOP mega-donor David Koch.”

This issue is the ultimate proof that the Republican Party never has and never will be part of the solution. On all issues (moral and fiscal) they surrender and advocate for a slower march to hell. But alas, we reached the point of no return years ago. To paraphrase a great leftist “What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?”.

The answer of course is none, except that these Republicans can rest assured that when the losers are put against the wall… they… will be last. I only regret, I won’t be around to see it. The leftist can rest assured that when the nut-ball Islamics behead the heretics, they will be last (after paying jizya for a few years). I really regret, I’ll miss that. 🙂

Video: See Stephen Crowder go and do what leftist homosexuals would not dare…